RICHARD DAVIS: Tie vote in House isn't charming

As they gripped the two-handled gavel like a wishbone Monday, co-Speakers Frank Chopp and Clyde Ballard may have wished for a tiebreaker, for just one more member to give his caucus the majority.

But after the gavel banged, the Washington House settled into the second consecutive session with a 49-49 tie. The Legislature can act this year to make sure that this is the last such session.

Set aside the platitudes about how the two leaders made it work last time. They did.

And discount promises that the closely divided Legislature will pull together to resolve the budget crisis, put together a bipartisan transportation package, address skyrocketing energy costs and tackle the host of other issues that regularly confront lawmakers.

Maybe, but the tasks are made more difficult by the partisan draw.

Ties don't work. With an evenly divided House, everything becomes a negotiation, from office space to the agendas for committee hearings.

Nothing comes to a vote unless the leaders agree.

In the best of times, it's easier to stop legislation than to pass it. With a split House, the brakes are always engaged.

Sometimes, we benefit. Last biennium, the divided House became the killing ground for a lot of bad Senate-passed legislation. But when the Legislature fails to act decisively, special interests may resort to the initiative process. As we've seen, initiatives often create more messes than they clean up.

In the weeks following the election, political analysts read the tea leaves to divine the cause of the House bisection. They speculated about failed campaign strategies, voter ambivalence or apathy and the presence of third-party candidates.

Ties happen because they can happen.

And they can only happen when the number of representatives in the chamber is divisible by two. With 49 state senators, there are no ties.

For most of the state's history, House ties were not possible. But since 1972, when the House dropped from 99 members to 98, three of the 15 elections - 20 percent - have resulted in ties.

Perhaps more important, in 1983 voters approved a constitutional amendment establishing a bipartisan redistricting commission, beginning with the 1992 redistricting. Gone were the days of gerrymandering to achieve partisan advantage. The legislative districts would more accurately reflect the electorate. For a swing state, that would mean more close elections and slim legislative majorities. In the five elections under the 1992 plan, we've had two ties, 1998 and 2000. Far from an unusual occurrence, that's 40 percent.

Barring major changes in Washington's electorate, we can expect more of the same. Ties will be frequent unless the Legislature acts to make them impossible. The state constitution requires only that the House be composed of between 63 and 99 members, so lawmakers can increase (or reduce) the House membership by one.

With legislative redistricting set to occur, lawmakers have the perfect opportunity to make a change. A redistricting commission will be named next week to draw the lines for congressional and legislative districts, reflecting the results of the 2000 Census.

Currently, we have 49 legislative districts. From each, voters elect one senator and two representatives. The easiest adjustment would be to retain the 49 Senate districts and create 99 single-member House districts of equal population.

The change to 99 single-member districts, moreover, would bring an additional benefit. The House districts would be about half the size of the Senate districts, reducing the cost of campaigning and making it easier for candidates to meet the voters. The result: more competitive House races.

Some House members may resist the change for political reasons. With representatives and senators running from the same legislative districts, when a Senate seat becomes open, the representatives have a built-in campaign advantage. But incumbent protection is not the goal of redistricting.

The House needs co-speakers like an orchestra needs two conductors. It's time to retire the two-handled gavel and restore accountability and undivided leadership to the Legislature.

Richard Davis is president of the Washington Research Council. Reach him at the council, 108 S. Washington Ave., Suite 406, Seattle, WA 98104 or at rsdavis@researchcouncil.org

Redistricting, Part Deux. ....When the state Redistricting Commission seemingly ended its run last month without agreeing on new boundaries for Washington's nine congressional districts, it looked like the intensely partisan fight would shift to the studiously nonpartisan state Supreme Court for the first ... [Read More...]

* It does matter how the boundary lines are drawn in the new legislative map. There is nothing more political than the redrawing of legislative and congressional districts that takes place every 10 years following the U.S. Census. Districts that today elect representatives to ... [Read More...]

As Washington lawmakers slog through their "Session from Hell," they can at least be grateful they don't have to deal with two touchy issues that can instantly tie up a state legislature: their pay and their district boundaries. In both cases, the voters ... [Read More...]

* The proposal to add a seat to the state House would unsettle a simple organization of legislative districts. To manage a tie better, the House should change its rules. Democracy can be inconvenient. ...Sometimes voters, as much by chance as by design, play ... [Read More...]